Terrorism (Detention and Human Rights)

I accept that, as it is precisely the point on which I was congratulating my hon. Friend’s Committee. As an aside, in substance we have before us a review of the whole of PACE. As part of the process, it might well be appropriate to take the counter-terrorism-related aspects of PACE to one side and deal with them in quicker fashion than the longer-term review that is overdue or due now. I am sorry that that does not take us much further in terms of current thinking on legislation. I assure both Committees and this Chamber that we are looking in substance at all of the suggestions that have been made. This labours the point, and I apologise for doing so, but none offer an alternative to our current position. They may well enhance some aspects of it, and we might reach the stage where a package means that we do not have to open up the 28 days—I simply do not know. It might be that the emphasis should be on 28 days and no more. I do not know whether we could collectively come up with a set of extraordinary circumstances where we might go beyond that, what the level of evidence that would be required for such a scenario would be or what the judicial oversight and all the other areas that would be involved would be. Within this whole panoply there is a duty on us all to revisit constantly the balance between liberty and public security. I want to come back to points made about pre-legislative scrutiny and the consolidated Bill.